Previous tennants mail

alanq

Why are you all assuming that the previous tenant was lazy? My former neighbour did all the right things informing all the right people and paying Royal Mail for redirection and still several items of mail arrived (not all of them junk mail). If the OP doesn't get into trouble then they should do. How much effort is it to put a letter back into a post box? Do they also bin any mail that is delivered by Royal Mail to the wrong address? How would they feel if their mail was treated in this way?

I wouldn't have kept the mail unless requested to do so as that would cause delay in dealing with the issue. Also unless one knew the addressee what would stop anyone turning up and claiming someone else's mail?

ihateyes

alanq wrote: »

Why are you all assuming that the previous tenant was lazy?

because the previous tenant is calling to pick up mail.....
if they had changed address or redirected, the presumption would be that it would be delivered correctly.

custardy

ikati5 wrote: »

Tell her you reposted it in the box, ..it all goes to Ireland and gets destroyed

no it doesnt

alanq

ihateyes wrote: »

because the previous tenant is calling to pick up mail.....
if they had changed address or redirected, the presumption would be that it would be delivered correctly.

That may be your presumption. My presumption, given the experiences of my neighbour mentioned above, would be that despite my best efforts some mail would get through and I would ask the new tenant if that was the case.

hunsbury0

Do not admit that you have destroyed/binned the mail.
Just say that you have marked "return to sender" & put it back in the mail box.
If she wants her mail, then the owness is on her to to infrom her contacts the change of address & also to arrange with royalmail to have her mail re-directed.
You are not her mail management agent !!!! end off.

Good luck

jane12345

Thanks for all your replies.

Does anyone know for sure if its breaking the law? I didnt technically destroy it (nor did i open it) i simply picked it up and threw it in the bins in my front garden.

I admitted to the previous tennant that i had received letters although
i suppose if push came to shove i could change my story and say i never received any mail if they got anyone else involved.

Valli

The ONLY relevant law is the Royal Mail are legally obliged to deliver to the ADDRESS on the envelope - not the named person.

It's NOT ILLEGAL to open mail addressed to your address EVEN IF you're not the person named on the envelope - although it is a common misconception.

However the Roayl Mail website recommends that incorrectly addressed mail (or misdelivered mail) is marked as such and popped in a postbox.

THAT IS WHY SOME COMPANIES MARK ENVELOPES PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL ADDRESSEE ONLY - in order to ensure that onlythe person to whom the letter is addressed opens it.

taxmessage

A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/section/84

custardy

taxmessage wrote: »

A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/section/84

which means it doesnt apply to the OP

chattychappy

taxmessage wrote: »

A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/section/84

It has been correctly delivered. Also no intention to act to the detriment.

(This is the link http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/26/section/84)

jane12345 wrote: »

Does anyone know for sure if its breaking the law? I didnt technically destroy it (nor did i open it) i simply picked it up and threw it in the bins in my front garden.

Well, you asked the question. For criminal liability, at a real push, possibly s1 Theft Act 1968 or s1 Criminal Damage 1971. For theft, the prosecution would have to prove dishonesty (the "Ghosh" test). For Criminal Damage there are a number of defences, for example s5(2)(a), basically "I didn't think they would mind".

Honestly, unless there are facts beyond what you have said here, the police/CPS would just think someone was having a giraffe if they suggested a prosecution..

The disgruntled tenant might start a civil action - but again, pretty hopeless IMHO.